On 19 and 20 June, the police misconduct panel will decide on the penalty to be afforded to the officer who abused his position of authority to sexually harass Kristina O’Connor, following her success in the Court of Appeal.

In 2011 Ms O’Connor reported an assault by a group of young men at Kentish Town Police Station. James Mason, then a Detective Sergeant, made wholly inappropriate advances of a sexual nature towards Ms O’Connor. He subsequently sent inappropriate emails to her. His actions caused her extreme discomfort and distress at a time when she was a vulnerable victim of crime. The experience has caused her to lose faith in the ability of police officers to keep her, or other women, safe.

Ms O’Connor complained about Mr Mason’s conduct in October 2020. In 2021 a police misconduct panel found Mr Mason guilty of gross misconduct (conduct which amounts to a breach of the police standards of professional behaviour which is so serious that dismissal would be justified). Despite this, Mr Mason was served with a three-year final written warning; he was allowed to remain in post and keep his rank. In October 2022 he resigned.

The Court of Appeal found that the panel had not provided an adequate analysis of, or adequate reasons for, its finding in relation to the seriousness of Mr Mason’s misconduct, or for its finding in relation to his levels of culpability or the harm caused to Ms O’Connor. The Court of Appeal held that this amounted to an error of law. The court noted that Mr Mason’s actions amounted to deliberate and targeted misconduct by a police officer, involving sexual impropriety towards a vulnerable victim. The court found it difficult to identify why the panel had considered that the sanction of a final written warning was more appropriate than the more serious outcomes of reduction in rank or dismissal.

The Court of Appeal made an order that there should be a fresh hearing before the same misconduct panel. That hearing will take place on Thursday 19 June and Friday 20 June.

Nancy Collins, partner in our Public Law team says:

Kristina has been extraordinarily brave in her tireless pursuit for justice. She chose to waive her anonymity and fight to challenge the outcome of a complaints process that failed to reflect the gravity of the experience she suffered through the serious misconduct of an officer, in whom she had placed her trust. She has exposed the failures of the system. It is imperative that those who abuse positions of power are properly held to account and that the gravity of their actions is accurately reflected in any penalty awarded.

Kristina O’Connor says:

Regardless of the panel’s decision, my experience has taught me that the police cannot be trusted with women’s safety. I was abused by a police officer who should have been helping me. Since reporting his behaviour I have seen first-hand how the police were more interested in protecting themselves than helping me find justice, or protecting other women.

I have spent many years questioning whether the policing system can be fixed, and have come to the conclusion that if we are serious about women’s safety, it needs replacing entirely. I believe we need to abolish the police and establish an entirely new public service that actually protects and cares for women and communities.

Fighting the system is exhausting and terrifying. But what is more scary is the thought of a world where victims do not speak out, which allows police abuse to continue with impunity. There’s a network of incredible women out here fighting and teaching others how to fight, so I want to encourage women to continue to speak out, if they feel able to.

Ms O’Connor is represented by Nancy Collins, partner, and Rebecca Argall, paralegal, of Bindmans. Before the Court of Appeal she was represented by Maya Sikand KC and Rosa Polaschek of Doughty Street Chambers. Ms O’Connor was represented by Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC and Fiona Murphy KC in the Administrative Court, and by Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC, Fiona Murphy KC and Rosa Polaschek in connection the application for permission to appeal.
Ms O’Connor’s case continues to be supported by Law for Change.

Above: Kristina O’Connor